Detalhes bibliográficos
| Ano de defesa: |
2006 |
| Autor(a) principal: |
Echagüe, Verônica Lopez |
| Orientador(a): |
Sério, Tereza Maria de Azevedo Pires
 |
| Banca de defesa: |
Não Informado pela instituição |
| Tipo de documento: |
Dissertação
|
| Tipo de acesso: |
Acesso aberto |
| Idioma: |
por |
| Instituição de defesa: |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo
|
| Programa de Pós-Graduação: |
Programa de Estudos Pós-Graduados em Psicologia Experimental: Análise do Comportamento
|
| Departamento: |
Psicologia
|
| País: |
BR
|
| Palavras-chave em Português: |
|
| Palavras-chave em Inglês: |
|
| Área do conhecimento CNPq: |
|
| Link de acesso: |
https://tede2.pucsp.br/handle/handle/16773
|
Resumo: |
The purpose of the present study was to verify the levels of preference for a cooperative task, compared with an individual task, when manipulated: a) the reinforcer magnitude on the cooperative task; and b) the ratio for gaining reinforcers on the cooperative task. The research was contucted using a procedure similar to that used in Schmitt and Marwell (1971a), and using a definition of cooperation proposed by Guerin (1994). 16 men and women, aging from 25 to 40 years old, were divided into 8 pairs. They went through three experimental conditions, to which they were exposed during three sessions of 20 minutes length. In Condition I, the participants could work only individually; in Condition II, they could work only cooperatively; in Condition III, the participants could choose between the two tasks. On the first session, in which the participants were exposed to all the tree conditions, the reinforcer magnitude was higher on the cooperative task, than on the individual task. In session 2, in which the participants were exposed only to conditions II and III, the reinforcer magnitude was even higher on the cooperative task, while it was the same as session 1, on the individual task. On the third session, in which the participants were exposed to conditions II and III again, the ratio for gaining reinforcers on the cooperative task was higher than session 2, while it was the same as session 2, in the individual task. Results indicated that, when the reinforcer magnitude was increased, there was a preference for cooperation: the participants spent more time working on the cooperative task, and made few choices, almost all for cooperation. The results also indicated that, when the ratio to gain reinforces was increased, there was a disruption on the preference for cooperation: the participants spent less time cooperating than in session 2 and made more choices than in session 2 |
